Join Our Mailing List!

SNA Lincoln Yards Survey: Community Response on what "should be rejected"

From what you've seen/heard/read so far being proposed what "should be rejected" in the Lincoln Yards proposal? What is an absolute must go?

Fundamentally there needs to be more green space.

I hate the idea of a soccer stadium being built. We do not need a stadium in this development. There is no chance I will support this development unless this is rejected.

no it shouldn't be rejected. These projects breath new life into the city

-stadium

-exclusive privileges to LiveNation

-large concert stadium

#1 the soccer stadium (sounds like a money-loser to me) #2 scale back the towers

$100 Million in taxpayer subsidized infrastructure improvements. Make Sterling Bay pay for it all.

1. This area should be reserved for manufacturing, skills training, and R&D. 2. The area already has too much retail/entertainment for the infrasturcture to support.

1.) Reject high density:

Considering that this development is a mere 53-acres of the 760-acre North Branch Corridor, in which other lots are quickly becoming available, we should consider not only whether the area can absorb Lincoln Yards’ density, but surrounding lots of comparable density. My strong inclination is that even a greatly improved transit infrastructure will not be able to accommodate the crowds of even Lincoln Yards.

Page 34 of the North Branch Corridor Framework Plan describes: “Implementation of new land use parameters should reflect the unique characteristics of each corridor sub-area, providing for new office, retail and select residential uses in the North; light industrial and office uses in the Central, and higher- density office; retail and select residential uses in the South.” Please note that “higher-density” is delineated for the south sub-zone, not the north. As the Tribune’s Blair Kamin explained, the development would plunk downtown-like density amidst 2-3 story homes and 3-flats. While David Reifman and the DPD seek to expand downtown’s perimeter by 25%, Lincoln Yards is three miles from downtown, amidst RS3s and RS4s. Downtown-density development at such a distance appears outside of the DPD’s intent as indicated in the Framework Plan and other announcements about the Downtown Expansion Area.

The rush times (quick ingress and exits) of planned uses like concerts and games is also of concern in a neighborhood which couldn’t even accommodate the traffic to/from the former Illinois Air Team emissions testing station on Webster, which caused backups on surrounding roads (Webster, Elston, Clybourn) of over a mile. Transit is represented as a panacea, but other large venues which are better served by transit than Lincoln Yards ever hopes to be still experience severely disrupted traffic and as people continue to use cars.

2.) Reject inadequate open space (whether via on site of PD or via provision of funding):

Lincoln Yards’ projected populations look to be in the realm of 30-35K daytime (or up to 55K if there’s a daytime soccer game) and 10K-45K in the evening (again, quite variable based on the stadium and music venues). Open space guidelines are conceptualized as acreage per 1,000 people. While Chicago long low-balled its goal at 2 acres/ 1,000, it now aims for 4-5 acres/1,000 (still significantly lower than the 10 acres/1,000 aimed for within the Chicago region). Yet, Sterling Bay’s projected populations and allotted 13 acres will leave their own residents, workers, and patrons scrambling for space at ratios ranging from, at best 1.3 acres/1,000ppl (13.44ac/10K) to, at worst 0.24acres/1,000ppl (13.44ac/55K)! Yes, the City can step in to try to bring things up to a vaguely more livable standard, but this will take a huge investment and Sterling Bay’s financial contributions provide little for needed transportation infrastructure, let alone parkland. I would suggest instead, that if SB considers an allocation of 13 acres POPOS, that they apply the ratio to determine an appropriate site population. At 4acres/1,000, this would allow 3,200 people. Considering that the city might drop to the lower former standard of 2acres/1,000, 13acres would allocate enough open space for 7.5K people. Alternatively, should the City begin to embrace substantial contiguous publicly-owned parkland within the North Branch Corridor, there might be enough parkland to accommodate some increased density at Lincoln Yards. Planners, however, should consider that developers are champing to build neighboring lots as densely as possible and that Lincoln Yards will not be the sole user of potential new parkland.

3.) Reject public shouldering of SB’s speculative investment

The presentation featured various maps and lists showing improvements in infrastructure, but no indication about who would be expected to foot the bill. The speculative burden of this project should rest with Sterling Bay. The current infrastructure is a known quantity for which Sterling Bay has knowingly designed facilities expected to host considerable populations. WTTW reported a potential for $1 billion in infrastructure improvements. Though Sterling Bay anticipates positive revenue for the city, that is not a given. Likewise, Sterling Bay’s planned ‘financial contributions’ are but a drop in the infrastructure bucket. I was disappointed that while the presentation featured transportation and infrastructure upgrades, there was no indication that Sterling Bay doesn’t plan to pay for these plans – there should be financial transparency regarding public expenses.

4.) Reject Live Nation’s monopolistic practices

I am particularly concerned about Live Nation and the detrimental effect their monopolistic practices could have on Chicago’s music scene. The most immediate effect, of course, will be on the beloved Hideout. But the radius clauses that LiveNation imposes on performers will stretch far beyond and impact other venues that have embraced burgeoning performers, artistic exploration, and Chicago in all its diversity for decades. I lament that I may no longer be able to see performers from Glen Hansard to Billy Corgan to Mavis Staples at the Hideout and that a hegemonic corporate monolith will take the place of all such original venues in the city.

5.) Reject the soccer stadium at the proposed scale of 20,000.

20K capacity is quite large, as average USL attendance in other cities is 4,300 and Chicago already has a major league soccer team which is required to remain in Bridgeview for the foreseeable future. Is the stadium actually intended for both soccer and large concerts? A multi-purpose space which demands more frequent sudden influxes and egresses of patrons will further burden our infrastructure and neighborhoods.

6.) Reject lack of transparency thus far exhibited by Sterling Bay. Their plans were woefully lacking and insultingly lacking in detail. They also neglected to discuss plans for the other 17 acres that they already own, the metal processing facility on Elston they have since acquired, or their overall plans for this nexus of Lincoln Park/Bucktown.

1)All of the stadiums which will tie up traffic on the three east-west through streets and make the surrounding neighborhoods fill with thousands of people, parked cars where we park our cars, and intolerable congestion. 2) 70 story structures which do not fit in with this neighborhood.

20,000 seat stadium must be rejected regardless of any other modifications of the plan. The noise and congestion from such a venue will lower property values in Sheffield Neighborhood and increase congestion beyond already intolerable levels. It is hard to imagine that the increase in foot traffic exiting the Armitage El Stop to access such a venue will not increase crime in the area...even if it is limited to disturbance of the peace and public intoxication. The entire project is a horrible idea that benefits certain private interests while imposing horrible burdens on surrounding residential areas. We will all hear the noise from a 20,000 seat stadium. The impact on infrastructure will undoubtedly impose even further tax burdens on Lincoln Park residents. I oppose any further special tax zones to support a private development. Taxes in Chicago have already made living in Lincoln Park a major negative, more will only affect housing prices.

20,000 seat stadium; high rise buildings

20,000 seat stadium. The area is already congested with nothing on that land i can not even imagine how it could sustain 5k people attended an event let along 20k. I live in this neighborhood because it is not as congested as lakeview.

20,000 seat stadium. We have so many great music venues in the city. we don't need this. For what? And the ones who would attend will DRIVE THEIR CARS! Those of us who live here must be able to get to the Kennedy. Or simply across the river to attend, for example, a yoga class. It's already impossible, at rush hour, to get to a yoga class that is only 1.5 miles away and I have to allow a half hour.

20,000 seat stadium. 800 foot tower.

20,000 soccer stadium, largest live music venues, too tall high rises, too many people.

20k seat soccer stadium and large live music venue, use land for residents and workers and to unite neighborhoods

20k stadium, no Live Nation.

60K music venue, Tall high rises not enough park land, failure to deal with traffice problems that would develop.

70 story building much too tall for area

70 story tower, 20,000 stadium, exclusive contract with Live nation

70 story towers are insane - I will be absolutely livid if anything >10 stories goes up. It’s a smaet tactic by Sterling Bay - anchoring everyone to 70 stories, so that they can propose a “compromise” solution of 40-50 stories and look like a good partner. Don’t be fooled. 40-50 story towers will look horrible and represent a terrible outcome for owners/residents in the 43rd ward.

70-80 story buildings are beyond unacceptable. Music venue should be eliminated, we already have the Congress Theater being revamped nearby. And the 20,000 seat stadium size should be cut in 1/2.

70-80 story high rise. soccer/concert stadium

70-80 story high-rises are completely inappropriate for the location. A 20,000 seat stadium is also wrong.

700-800 foot building and stadium

700-800 foot high-rises. Not appropriate for this neighborhood.

700-800 foot tall buildings are almost never friendly to building a lively street life and appealing neighborhoods. They belong next to significant open space, such as along the lakefront, not in the midst of a dense neighborhood.

800 foot building - a non-starter, are you effing kidding me?!?!? Sterling Bay's CEO needs a stadium for his kid to play lacrosse? whatever. which means no way do I need that headache so his kid doesn't have to go the the suburbs for lacrosse.

A 20,000 person stadium seems ridiculous in terms of its impact on traffic. Cortland alone is a current mess, Webster gets nasty during rush hour. Traffic _must_ be a priority

A 20,000 person stadium!! There area is not large enough. Projections even in the past haven't been monitored / reassessed / or redesigned enough to handle current capacities.

A 20,000 person venue sounds like a terrible idea. Giving Live Nation sole rights over a 5,000 - 10,000 venue isn't much better.

A 20,000 seat stadium is poor land use. While the impact on auto traffic is irrelevant, the land would better serve the city as anything else (residential, office, retail, or even open space).

A Live Nation monopoly. A 20,000-seat stadium it too large.

A music venue? Are you kidding me? Run by LiveNation? Are you FURTHER kidding me? I can't think of a worse idea. If you want North Branch to turn into Wrigleyville, be my guest. But this is a neighborhood that still has character, and adding a venue like this would completely strip that character away. Surrounding rent prices would skyrocket. What little integrity is left would be gone.

A soccer stadium that will be used by a lower level of soccer than the MLS? Who the heck is going to go watch that? Also, the shear volume of people who would come to the area needs to be reduced- they propose packing way too much in the given space.

A stadium and single company owned concert sites should be scrapped.

A venue which it seems is of questionable value to the area should be rejected (if citizens are listened to this time)!! Also, space for a park (green space) is of vital importance!

And something must be stipulated that live nation remove its non compete clause for artists who work with them. This will devastate smaller venues in the area

Absolutely no major venues. Not only will they create traffic problems (east west traffic is already bad, with nothing on the site), but they will compete with local venues which are much more in the spirit of Chicago. And absolutely no 70 story towers. Look at the impact on neghborhood already of mid size residential developments such as the former Children’s Memorial Hospital site.

Absolutely what should be rejected is the density Sterling Bay calls for in their plan. It is twice what the current zoning allows. The proposed high rise should be rejected without any hesitation. The complete lack of detail in this plan should be rejected. The 20,000 seat stadium should be rejected. The lack of open park space (not walkways) should be rejected.

Adding more single occupancy vehicle capacity should be eliminated. The location of this development cannot handle a substantial increase in car traffic, and all 'traffic congestion' mitigation efforts should focus on moving people - better transit (rail and bus), high-comfort bikeways, parking management strategies, etc. Massive parking structures should be eliminated, and existing surface parking lots should be better utilized and converted to shared parking facilities. High-rise buildings should also be eliminated. Successful urban neighborhoods consist of 4-8 story buildings that promote walkability, small-business development, and urban character that is not designed around the automobile (think SF, Paris, Boston, etc).

Affordable housing

All of it.

All of it. All of it. All of it.

All of the so-called "entertainment" venues should be replaced with an expansive community park and field house.

Am least excited/interested in a concert venue proposal. Stadium or office park combined with housing is a much better proposal.

amazon and livenation must go.

Amazon, high rise towers, most everything commercial, and anything that impacts traffic. This should not be a mini downtown. It should continue to feel like a Chicago “neighborhood” with trees, grass, flowers and character.

An independent traffic study MUST be done. This is not like Wrigley Field (on an el line) and the area is already really dense with traffic, and the river is limiting.

Any apartment/condo towers that are over 10 stories.

any form of high rise structure, any form of stadium/auditorium/theater

Any initiatives that create transients with no investment or stake in the success of the neighborhood (stadiums, venues).

Any kind of large stadium or large residential high rise is ridiculous. It only reflects the city’s immense greed, and will only make our (current residents’) lives miserable due to congestion. I don’t believe you for a minute if you say that revenue from this project will decrease my taxes. What a joke.

Any large stadium or indoor concert venue and any extremely tall high rises must go.

Any proposed roads that are multi-lane and/or not following CDOT's complete streets guidelines should be immediately rejected. Any retail developments that are internally oriented, rather than outward facing/integrated into the overall city grid (ala New City) should be immediately rejected.

Any stadium, any high rises

Any stadiums/concert venues

Any venue grossly exceeding the number of seats as surrounding venues (such as Steppenwolf), any buildings exceeding the number of stories of current buildings within a mile of the proposed site (such as the dorms at De Paul or the new CH Robinson headquarters)

Anything that brings 7,000 or 20,000 people to the area for one event should be rejected. (concerts, sports, etc.) There's no way the city is going to build an el line over there. Buses are ineffective and add to the traffic so don't tell us that's a solution.

Anything that doesn't address traffic flow with new proposed density

Anything that involves Live Nation is bad for the City Of Chicago.

Better transportation options to connect the existing public transit infrastructure with the new development

Both the enormous stadiums/concert venues and large residential buildings must go - far too much traffic in that area already exists.

Buildings are too tall and a poor fit for the neighborhood feel. Too much density. Too much traffic. Not enough park space - we have an incredible opportunity to add more park space and are wasting it with greed. Soccer stadium and performance venue are unnecessary and will destroy Chicago's local music scene. There are already so many empty storefronts all along Milwaukee and North Ave nearby that we do not need more. Traffic is already a nightmare and will be so much worse, especially getting on the highway

Buildings over 12 stories are too high for the neighborhood. A stadium and concert venue at this location make no sense. Traffic going west to the expressway is already far too congested, even with the site currently vacant.

BY FAR, the proposal of a 20k seat stadium should be rejected. Not only can the roads not handle the traffic, there is nowhere for cars to park, traffic on the highway would be worse, neighboring homes and businesses would cripple under the impact and see less visits from customers who are avoiding the area. Stadium is the WORST idea by far.

Car-centric designing of the space will limit the options available for effective planning. Eliminate solely focusing on traffic, and focus on making the area livable and dense, similar to the Lake Shore East development, which has no traffic problems, and 100,000+ people!!

Compromise on 70 story building, stadium without good public transit

concert evnue

Concert venue and rethink size of soccer stadium

Concert venue and soccer stadium. Beyond traffic impact, there's literally no demand for them in this area.

current proposed density. large scale entertainment stadiums. Even 5000 seats is too much. No room for cars. Not enough access!

Density is too high and not enough thought given to congestion

Density of the project is too great.

Development of the North branch corridor- that level of density should not be permitted. The park proposal is of utmost importance, both for managing density/infrastructure problems and for adding a valuable asset to the neighborhood.

Don't know.

Don’t like the soccer stadium. There is already a soccer stadium in Chicago, don’t think we need another. The area is already over congested and there isn’t enough public transit to the venue space.

Everything should be rejected. Ricketts already has a ballpark and Sterling Bay shouldn't own all of Chicago's up-and-coming neighborhoods

Everything. We don't need a multi-billion corporation established as a dictator in our neighborhood.

Exclusivity of Live Nation should go, the stadium should go

Get rid of the idea of a 20,000 seat stadium and 80 story highrises

Had to say as Sterling Bay has not been forthcoming with their plans, I fact I believe they're consistantly lied. Claiming they didnt have density estimates was insulting. Any highrises above 20 stories is unexceptable.

Height of buildings. It is inappropriate to have very tall buildings next to lowrise buildings with height restrictions

High density housing and lack of commitment to providing public goods

High rise building heights, the stadium and performance venues, costly infrastructure that will only take the area from an F on accessibility to a D

High rise buildings

High rise buildings

High rise buildings should not be allowed and the stadium idea should be carefully vetted with a leaning towards elimination.

High rise buildings, the music venue, the sports stadium, Amazon, hotels, the entire project as proposed will cause much harm and only line the pockets of the rich and powerful.

High rise construction and the stadium.

High rise housing, stadium and concert venue

High rise,, stadium, concert venue

high risers & any stadium

High rises and the soccer stadium must go

High rises are out of character with the neighborhood and will also contribute to too much congestion and should be eliminated. Large venues will also bring too much congestion and should also be eliminated.

High rises i.e. bldgs. over 5 stories), the soccer stadium (unless it is a Chicago Park District run stadium, fieldhouse, gym, baseball field, etc.) and definitely the concert venue no matter who runs it.

High rises, concert venues, soccer stadium

High rises, high density buildings, soccer and concert stadiums, downtown in the heart of lincoln park/bucktown...

High rises.

hotel, live nation venues.

huge venues for sports and music need to go. We want residents and not too many of those

I am concerned about so many things. This feels to me like another political move of development just being pushed through for payouts to those helping it get pushed through.

I am concerned about traffic on North Avenue - it is my primary artery to 94

I do not think there are any absolute must go items.

I don't object to high rise buildings IF there is new mass transit access as the resultant tax base would be beneficial to neighboring areas and businesses

I don't think anything is an absolute must go at this point, because there is not a straight-forward proposal - everything still seems very visionary. Without costs, funding and impact studies, anything goes...

I don't think anything should be completely rejected yet but we need more information on how they will mitigate the impact of the stadium and how the cost of building new bridges will be covered

I don't think the developers should be forced to conform their plans to satisfy every community group that wants to shape the project to suit their priorities.

I don’t know if the world needs another stadium. I think that 80 story buildings are too much, but some verticality is fine. I think deals with live nation that favor them are not a good idea. And I think public transit solutions must be part of the plan.

I don’t mind the stadium idea, as long as it gives us plenty of open park public space, and an extention of the 606 to easily connect LP and Wicker/Bucktown. Open park space is what this community needs.

I don’t reject anything

I HATE the 70 story buildings. Those will change the area from beautiful new neighborhood development to a new area of downtown.

I have not yet seen anything that "should be rejected." I am interested in learning about additional transit planning, including the Armitage exit and the Armitage/Ashland/Elston intersection.

I just want more bridges for traffic. I don’t care too much about anything else.

I laughed out loud at the music venue along north avenue. Have you seen the traffic there all day long? Yes. This is not a well thought out plan. It should be rejected

I like all the proposals.

I STRONGLY DISAGREE with Amazon coming to Chicago. We already have a severe housing shortage for middle-class residents. If Amazon comes here, the already bleak outlook for millennials to own purchase a house will be be almost unattainable. I do NOT support the 20,000 stadium with exclusive Live Nation rights; this is non-competitive and will severely hurt local music establishments--just look at the failure of Northerly Island.

I think the 20k stadium should be rejected unless there are sufficient plans to address the congestion from the highways to Lincoln Park and surrounding areas.

I think the 70 floor building must go. That is too tall for LP.

I think the stadium should be eliminated.

I think the stadium should be on hold until the basic plan is input and an analysis is done of that impact on that neighborhood and the surrounding neighborhoods

I think they should be talking about how to bring the "L" and buses to that area if they are planning to put housing or business in that area. I think they should scrap the live music venue idea. There are enough music venues in the City already.

I think we need to steadfastly reject the park space proposal and push for more open, public park space to be used along the river. Also, the idea that you would build a 70-80 story building in Lincoln Park should be rejected. This is unacceptable and will be an eye sore for the skyline. The density a building like that would create is too much. Are they really proposing to put Amazon HQ2 there or are they saying that so they can get the buildings approved?

I'm very concerned about the soccer stadium/live entertainment and the tall buildings. Correlatively, i'm concerned about effects on traffic congestion

If they can't figure out how to deal with the traffic, I think the 20,000 venue should be off the list. Developing something without keeping cars in the discussion is absurd.

Infrastructure should be the first part of the proposal in parallel to a well developed master plan. I don't think anything must go, just clear details about the proposals.

Intensity of development must be aligned with infrastructure, transportation and public parks. Developers must pay 100% of the cost of new infrastructure.

It already takes me 25 MINUTES to go less than a mile to the highway. If I'm going to the south side, the majority of my trip is spent on the surface streets trying to get to the highway. It's already RIDICULOUS that it takes me that long, and adding more people without adequate concern for traffic is appalling. ANY plan that develops that space will cause more traffic, let alone adding stadiums, venues, and office space. What used to be the quaint neighborhood of Lincoln Park is now becoming commercially overloaded and developers are stripping the neighborhood of the charm it once had. Buildings are going up that detract from the character of the neighborhood, and this would do the exact same thing. Though change is inevitable, it's CRITICAL to remember the people who have lived in Lincoln Park for 30+ years.

It makes no sense to shoe-horn in a soccer stadium on the north side of Chicago. Didnt we learn our lesson with Wrigley Field? The amount of density that is being reported doesn't make sense given the infastructure constraints of the this area.

It's not time to talk about rejection. Sterling Bay must share their master plan in order for a determination to be considered.

It’s unlikely that the soccer venue would be a good addition without ample parking or offsite parking with transportation.

Lack of public transportation

Large commercial venues such as an 8,000 person ampitheater and 20,000 person stadium must be eliminated. Buildings must be limited to no more than 10 stories. Elston is a valuable vein in the city for our first responders and it is my concern that these plans will severely restrain their ability to serve our community. The skate park should be rejected.

large concert venue and apartment bldg.

Large stadium, massive highrises, Live Nation

Less open space. Reduces income to the city and becomes a cost not an income stream.

Live concert venues

Live music venue with 20,000 seats.

Live Nation 20,000 seat facility

Live Nation plans, soccer stadium, high rises

Live Nation should not be allowed to have exclusivity to concerts in the area. It is bad for historic venues around Chicago as well as artists.

Live Nation size venue and large size stadium. A performance venue and athletic venue that can attract recreational and amateur sports teams, local performance groups might be a valued trade off. Green space must be increased.

LiveNation shouldn't be the only programming for the entertainment venue.

LiveNation shouldn’t manage the event space. Stadium should be managed by the Park District. Parking should be kept at the absolute minimum or possibly excluded entirely to minimize traffic. Park space shouldn’t be programmed for “recreation” no baseball diamonds, turf fields or tennis courts

Maximum building heights should be much less than what they proposed, in the 200 foot range. Also, they should not be granted an increase to the 5.0 FAR that they already have.

Maybe the Stadium....not sure. It may be too big. Is it also to be used by local schools and community centers?

Maybe the tallest high rises.

N/A

Need more car spaces than proposed. Must plan around community and not spite it. Public park must increase

Need more infrastructure improvements, less density, only mid rises

needs to be accepted or not accepted only after the major items are confirmed for the plan...

No

No

no absolute must goes

no arenas or concert venues

NO do not reject this development. This is an awesome opportunity for Lincoln Park.

No highrises

no soccer stadium, no concert venue. go sit on the cortland bridge in traffic at 5pm on a weeknight or a saturday or sunday morning and you'll see why.

no stadium - stadium should be on the west side near United Center and create jobs

No stadium and No high-rises. The Ricketts do not need another urban stadium, we do not want Bucktown to become "wrigleyville 2.0". I would support 20 story buildings (still quite an increase in density for the area).

No stadiums or large venues at all. No large y’all buildings. This is ridiculous

Not sure if the area can support a live music venue or stadium. Traffic is already difficult during peak times and it is mostly residential here.

Not taking into account cars for this area makes 0 sense. While Chicago is a dense urban city, it is not NYC - People still frequently use cars to get around and this should be accommodated for this area.

Nothing

Nothing

Nothing is a must go.

Nothing is an absolute must go. Everything is possible with the right planning and proper implementation.

Nothing outright

Nothing rejected if other demands are met.

Nothing should be flat out rejected. It's a start of a discussion.

Nothing should be rejected at this point. Jim DeRogatis is not an expert on anything.

Nothing should be rejected yet

Nothing so far should be outright rejected.

Nothing yet. I'm open minded.

Nothing, it is a good start. Now I want to see more details

Nothing, it’s all great!

Nothing. I think its brilliant. Maybe its too small and buildings not dense enough.

Nothing. As far as I'm concerned just turn the whole thing into a park

nothing. density is great.

Parking areas

Parking.

Pending the results of the traffic study, I don't find anything objectionable, for now.

Please do not put Amazon HQ2 there. What a headache that would be.

Please reject the 20K-seat stadium/LiveNation venue, the 70-storey condo/apt tower, the stated residential density in general; not too keen on Amazon locating in Chicago at all, much less here. Reject the volume and square footage of concrete in general -- more green space, waaayyyy more.

Proposal is very good

Proposal would create too much density with inadequate traffic relief. Omit stadium and music venue, limit all buildings to four stories.

Reduce the number of residences / people that will cause congestion!

reject housing

Reject overly tall buildings. Reject the 20,000 seat venue.

Reject sports venue. Reject large outdoor concert. Indoor might work. Reject hi rise skyscrapers and condos. If amazon or other, place the office space secondary to where beautiful settings for walking, parks, restaurants and shops and homes should go Office space should be tucked away if possible

Reject the 20,000 seat venue, the exclusive Live Nation Deal, the 700-800 foot high tower and the too small contiguous open spaces.

Reject- Live Nation, towers, mini parks operated in private, take over of river space, TIFs for Sterling Bay,

Since everything presented appeared completely theoretical, there is nothing I feel should outright be rejected without learning more concrete info about vehicle flow and parking.

Size of high rises. Infrastructure cost payed by taxpayers.Density problem.

Sky scrapers!

Skyscrapers and huge entertainment/sports venues

Soccer stadium

Soccer stadium

soccer stadium and concert stadium; we are not suburbs

soccer stadium and exclusive Live Nation venue.

Soccer stadium and live nation venue

SOCCER STADIUM AND MUSIC VENUE .. SPREAD MUSIC AROUND THE CITY IN LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS

soccer stadium, lack of park space, NEED a public transportation solution that is realistic

soccer stadium, live nation, tall buildings

Soccer stadium, music venue, tall buildings

Soccer stadium/live nation/hi-rises

Sport & music venues

Sports venue, music venue, and skyscapers.

Stadium

Stadium

Stadium

stadium

Stadium

stadium

Stadium

stadium

Stadium

Stadium

Stadium

Stadium

Stadium

Stadium - seems unnecessary and adds a ton of traffic.

Stadium - traffic, parking (renderings are unrealistic and show no lots) will kill this area.

Stadium and a venue would be too much

stadium and buildings over 6 stories high

stadium and concert venue--perhaps something smaller

Stadium and concert venues

Stadium and high rises

stadium and large venues

Stadium and live music venue

Stadium and revamp of the traffic study

Stadium and sky scraper both need to go.

Stadium large hi rises shops

Stadium or other large size venues

stadium, amphitheater

Stadium, large entertainment venues, high rises, minimal park space

Stadium, live venue, and high rises should go.

stadium, music venue and large areas of retail/housing. this area is too crowded with traffic already!

stadium. Building heights

Stadiums, big venues, anything over 20 stories

still too soon

Tall buildings belong downtown.

Tall high rise buildings must go.

Tall residential buildings & sports/ entertainment stadium.

That stadium. Strengthen the garden aspect of Lincoln park/triangle communities that have kept HOMEOWNERS (not transient renters) here for decades. Make it worthy of the best suburbs people leave chicago for. Keep it local. Keep families here. Chicago has always held the reputation of being a big city with a small town appeal. Save it!

The "Live Nation" piece and the 70 - 80 story high rises.

The 20,00 set stadium.

The 20,000 person soccer stadium and the 70 story high rises (even half that height is simply too high for this area and will also result in too many residents). The traffic resulting from either of these scenarios is simply incomprehensible. I drive to/from the Clyborn Metra stop on a daily basis and the traffic can be backed up for blocks right now. There is no way any reconfiguring will be able to accommodate the cars associated with so many people. To think that these people will just use public transportation is a daydream. Even if residents don't own cars, they will be using Uber. A recent study indicated that traffic in cities with Uber has actually increased because people are opting to use uber when they might have walked or used public transportation in the past.

The 20,000 person stadium and the idea of 70 to 80 story residential buildings.

The 20,000 seat concert venue

The 20,000 seat soccer stadium. How about building it and more sports facilities around the United Center? Michael Reese? Economically disadvantaged communities to the south, west...lots of land underutilized exists in the city close to transit with ample room for parking.

IMHO the Bears and the Cubs outgrew their homes and should have found bigger new dens for themselves by now for the benefit of the city (Super Bowl/Stanley Cup...) rather than destroying the dens they were brought up in along with their neighborhoods (Soldier Field parking lots marring the park (the City reneged on agreement to relocate what would become the battle ground over the Lucas Museum), and what formerly used to be a kind of charming and ramshackle residential neighborhood with mom and pop businesses around Wrigley that is now morphing into a brightly lit, very commercial Wrigley theme park-like "Attraction" replete with hotels, beer garden patio and other amenities to ensure that visitors dollars are all spent within the friendly confines.

The 20,000 seat stadium.

the 20,000 stadium for soccer doesn't seem necessary. I am not into sports at all so not into soccer. Did not realize so many people were interested in that or maybe they're not...

The 20,000-seat stadium. Chicago already has a pro soccer team, and I can't see this second team surviving. Then we have a vacant stadium. On top of that, the traffic for events there would be a nightmare. Also, the proposed 70-80-story high rises would look ridiculous there.

the 20K seat stadium there is no way the infrastructure currently in place could support a venue like that.

The 20k stadium

The 20K stadium is useless and not needed; we have plenty of theatres in Chicago and on the north side already. Nix the high rises . . . part of the beauty of Chicago is its contained structural development. townhomes, low rises, family-centered living -- these would be fine.

The 70 story buildings. That does NOT fit at all with the surrounding communities. The lack of open park space also does not support the proposed lifestyle.

The 70 story buildings. The 20,000 seat stadium/entertainment venue. The idea that density issues might somehow be abated by a "non-car-centric development" on a location- and transit-isolated site used as a significant traffic corridor to the interstates. Let's avoid another Rickettsville, the formerly-pleasant Wrigleyville morphed into an insufferable circus that's degrading the quality of life for an ever-widening swath of neighbors.

The 70 story high-rises are not feasible

The 70-80 story buildings, partnerships with Live Nation, and probably the soccer stadium

The 70-story tower.

The 700 foot tall buildings and 20,000 person arena

The 700-800 foot icon building should not be allowed. The Live Nation entertainment complex should be eliminated. The 20,000-seat United Soccer League stadium should also be eliminated.

the big stadium and the largest music venues; too much traffic.

The big venues, the lack of public transit, the lack of green space.

The building height. The lack of park space. Exclusive Live Nation licensing. The transit plans - because they are completely untenable.

The buildings are styled like they are downtown skysrapers - NOTHING about them blends in with the Lincoln Park or Bucktown neighborhoods which is extremely disappointing to me. There also needs to be MORE GREEN SPACE!

The concert venue

the concert venue - we need to keep the small local businesses

The concert venue and Amazon. I do not like that support of a non car-centered development plan was lumped in with support for the concert venue in the previous questions of this survey. To be clear, I strongly support a non-car centered infrastructure but am strongly opposed to the concert venue.

The density

The density and the 2nd loop. Downtown is one thing but this would now be a neighborhood and that means something. There is no need for so much housing the millennials may not want cookie cutter skyscrapers and if they did wouldn’t they live within walking distance of their job downtown? With empty buildings and storefronts nearby why do we need to build more vacant buildings? There is also no real public transit in the area. The metro goes only to the loop or the suburbs how is that a workable solution for anyone? Maybe you should add another TIF to the nearby neighbors to pay for a new L line or get Sterling Bay to cut into their profits to foot the bill. How about an area with houses and yards? Rather than highrises and windows.

The density and the 2nd loop. Downtown is one thing but this would now be a neighborhood and that means something. There is no need for so much housing the millennials may not want cookie cutter skyscrapers and if they did wouldn’t they live within walking distance of their job downtown? With empty buildings and storefronts nearby why do we need to build more vacant buildings? There is also no real public transit in the area. The metro goes only to the loop or the suburbs how is that a workable solution for anyone? Maybe you should add another TIF to the nearby neighbors to pay for a new L line or get Sterling Bay to cut into their profits to foot the bill. How about an area with houses and yards? Rather than highrises and windows.

The devil is in the details. Pretty pictures are not enough. Too early to say.

For a start we need a site plan, a map with proposed infrastructure projects, detailed open space plans, traffic studies. The soccer stadium and entertainment venues do not appear to be assets for our community

The entire plan-fully rendered, should be presented for public scrutiny-just as all plans, even for a single lot, are made public. There should be large community meetings for full citizen participation. Without such information, this should not be allowed to move through City Council- Sterling Bay has filed plans, but those plans have not been shared with the public.

THE ENTIRE PROPOSAL FOR LINCOLN YARDS MUST GO

The exclusivity given to Live Nation

The extension of the 606 is good. The stadium and any exclusive agreement for any entity is unacceptable.

The first must-go is the 20-30000 stadium arena concept despite who runs it. The density (traffic) alone will have a negative impact on the surrounding communities already stressed by traffic and congestion. There is no doubt it will be modeled after Wrigley so we can see where it is going and what it will look like when it is finished. Next the 70 story high rises should be eliminated. Structures that large will change the culture of the surrounding neighborhoods and increase the density of the area beyond what is reasonable for the infrastructure.

The height of the buildings is ridiculous and a 20,000 stadium is not practical in that area. As much as I would love a future not so dependant on cars this is just too big a leap. That "less car dependant future" should be encouraged and promoted, not mandated.

The high rise building and the soccer stadium

The high rise towers!!! No buildings that y’all should be allowed outside of the Loop.

The high rises.

The highrises and the entertainment venue.

the incredible scope should be rejected

The lack of green space is not acceptable. A no-bid contract for entertainment is a non-starter.

The lack of transparency and community input are my initial concerns. I feel the city needs far more park areas and open space. We should start with what is needed and then plan from there.

The large stadium and the very tall high rise should be rejected.

The large venue stadium concerns me the most.

The Live Nation exclusive tie is troubling. The soccer stadium feels unnecessary. The dog park is extravagant.

The mega stadium and the idea that we should not focus on cars. Many city dwellers work in the suburbs and trains are not an option. Plus, I won’t be going to LY if there is no where to park.

The more I read about it, the stadium should go.

The music venue and the fact that NO ONE is talking about how horrible it is to drive east west already and it will be a nightmare. And the impact to Oscar Mayer public school.

The music venues combined with the soccer stadium - maybe one venue would be workable, but all of them do not. And the city needs to explain its role in any discussions it has had thus far in the proposed construction or operation of any of these proposed venues.

The only major issue I have is related to density, in that too much is being crammed into the site. By extension, the concept of 700 plus foot towers are wholly out of place for the area. I would be willing to trade one huge tower for a much more open plan and a substantial reduction in the overall number of buildings as this would effectively reduce the density.

The proposed high rises will add too much density-unless offset by considerable more open space. Absolute must go.

20000 seat stadium-destined to local logistic/traffic nightmare. Seems to be a answer for a question that does not exist. Ties into the question about Live Nation. Absolute must go.

The shuttles to CTA.

The size of the buildings and entertainment venues is completely out of scale for the neighborhood and beyond what the area's transportation infrastructure can support.

The soccer stadium

The soccer stadium

The soccer stadium - stadium development will wreak havoc on city financies and stadium subsidies are again and again proved to be economic disasters. The large concert venues - Live Nation should not cut out important small venues in our neighborhood that encourages diversity of and intimate coommunity connection with culture. And to boot not having adequate parking for these venues concerns me.

The soccer stadium & the live event venue

The soccer stadium and if it’s true that live nation has an exclusive, that should be rejected. I’m not opposed to live nation, I’m just opposed to the exclusivity.

The soccer stadium must go. The infrastructure cannot support that volume of people.

The soccer stadium, the high rise(s) and the entertainment venue

The soccer stadium/concert venue and the skyscraper homes.

The sports stadium, the music venue, and very tall residential buildings because this specific part of the city cannot handle that much congestion.

The stadium

The stadium

The stadium

The stadium

The stadium

The stadium

The stadium

The stadium

The stadium and amphitheater should be removed- especially if the amphitheater is exclusive to Live Nation. The Live Nation brand is antithesis to the type of community that exists in the surrounding neighborhoods. Also, I think the idea of locating 70-story buildings in that neighborhood is bad. The height restrictions of adjacent neighborhoods will make new buildings stick out like a sore thumb.

The stadium and concert venue

The stadium and concert venue. Ridiculous. All high rise complexes. Sight lines should be low and traffic limited.

The stadium and entertainment venue

The stadium and live music venue

The stadium and Live Nation exclusivity must be eliminated.

the stadium and not designing with cars in mind

The stadium and skyscraper just sound like untenable ideas. If this were downtown construction, I think it would be reasonable to assume residents filling a skyscraper might not have cars, but in the neighborhoods, it’s not a reasonable assumption. As to the stadium, the live nation contract is extremely problematic to the local music scene and north avenue is a major artery that already needs bypass surgery. Adding thousands of cars on event nights would be insanity, and avoiding the area like one would avoid wrigleyville is simply not an option.

The stadium and the concert venue must go. The Amazon trucks should go elsewhere in the city.

The stadium and the concert venue. These will cost too much and won't bring in the revenue needed to sustain them. They will become albatrosses.

The stadium and the Live Nation

The stadium and the tall buildings.

The stadium could be a big pain in the ass.

The stadium is a ridiculous option.

The stadium is a terrible idea

The stadium is an all around disaster. The local area cannot support that influx of people. More importantly, we why would we want to? It will add noise and mess without improving the lives of the neighbors. In order for me to support any development, this must be removed.

A large (70-80 story) building is entirely counter to everything I know and love about the neighborhood. I moved from downtown to have a walking neighborhood with short buildings where I can see the sky and feel like I’m home at the end of the day. This will negatively impact that and has the potential to dramatically change the makeup of the neighborhood (and who knows what it will do to real estate prices!). We should cap building heights like the neighboring buildings (could easily argue for nothing taller than what currently exists within a certain radius).

The stadium is an inappropriate use at this location and should be removed

The stadium seems ridiculous.

The stadium seems to draw more traffic. More green space is better. Keeping and supporting small businesses should be supported they keep the charm. Enough box stores already in this area. More affordable housing should be emphasized for an already inflated area.

The stadium should absolutely be rejected. I have lived within ear shot of Wrigley for many years prior to moving to Lincoln Park. The trash, noise, commotion, etc. which comes from a stadium is not something I welcome in Lincoln Park. Paired with the congestion issues, it seems completely infeasible. The high-rise buildings should also be rejected. Not only will views be obstructed, the infrastructure of the area cannot handle that influx of people. Also, I worry about the implications on property values if supply skyrockets.

The stadium should absolutely go. The density would become absolutely insane, especially on concert nights. Clybourn is already busy. Webster, Courtland and North Avenue bridges are packed, even just at normal rush hour today. Even with additional bridges, the additional density would probably only make it worse.

The stadium venues, their plans for open space, the extremely tall residential towers, their ridiculous traffic solutions.

The stadium, large scale music venues, 70 story building

The stadium, the 3 music venues and the 80 story building must go

the stadium, the amplitheatre

The stadium, the high rises, the new high-density housing.

The stadium.

The stadium. High rise apartment and office space

The stadium/music venue. I could have bought my home in other neighborhoods with a stadium, but I didn't want to be near one. I chose this neighborhood in part because it had no major attraction that would draw huge crowds of people on a regular basis. I don't want the traffic and I don't want the litter left behind my careless attendees.

The stadiums and commercial performance venues. No hogh rises taller than what is already in the contiguous areas, e.g. yhe dome of a church in Bucktown or Wicker Park.

The stadiums and the downtownesq high rises should and need to go. The idea that this development is a "bridge" or "true link" between Wicker Park/Bucktown and Lincoln Park is unreasonable. If anything, this development serves to segregate the neighborhoods through congestion and density alone. The highway will ultimately serve as a boundary from which Chicagoans will not longer venture past simply because it will be too time consuming.

The tall (70-80 story) building. The amount of disruption required to construct the building will limit the other development on the site and cause way to much disruption.

The tall 700-800 feet tower. No matter the design, the area would not be able to handle the congestion that it will bring. Given the location and more luxurious productions from Sterling Bay, most of the future owners would be expected to own cars.

The tower for sure as well as the stadium. The live nation affiliation seems shady to us

The traffic plan should be rejected

The two primary problems with the current plan are 1) the timing, funding and near term practicality of the transportation improvements are highly speculative and 2) the site planning and placement of the buildings relative to each other and to the streets could use more work. IF all of the transportation improvements proposed were executed I think they would be adequate, however the developer doesn't control virtually any of the options they are proposing. They have suggested a bunch of improvements that OTHERS can do without providing any evidence that OTHERS are willing to take them on or provide the land/right of way to accomplish them. Further the one bridge they have proposed doesn't actually help as much as it could. Dominick Street as show dead ends in a T-intersection with Webster at a difficult spot right next to the bridge. That will be a major bottle neck. Instead the road over the new bridge should lead directly to Southport. Also they need to complete the grid further expending Dickens/Lakewood accross Clybourn to intersect at Kingsbury should also be done. That will help relieve the Clybourn intersections with Cortland, Webster and Southport. The developer's right to complete various phases of the project should be tied to various transportation improvements. If they aren't done they shouldn't build to the density they are asking. On the site planning I believe there are to few buildings spaced too far apart. It is unlike anything else in Chicago. The closest example is River East which is a sterile place. It doesn't have to look like Bucktown or Lincoln Park in its building form, but it should look a little more like Chicago. It seems more like one of Skidmore's new developments in the Middle East. The urban design as planned will not yield the level of retail and pedestrian density they are suggesting.

The whole project. 5 story mid rise and greater projects have no place in this community. These 5 story thru 12 story and greater projects have been City approved due the the new Ordinace allowing for greater density on existing footprints in the name of being near public transportation (ie., the L). However, commuters can tell you it is not very pleasant to ride overcrowded & broken trains. Also, the increase of pets may not be a good idea. People on social media already complain about pet owners not cleaning up.

There hasn't been enough detail to formally reject something. The range of information is broad - I couldn't veto a 20,000 seat stadium when I've only heard they are considering a soccer / concert venue. If SB stated "20,000 seats" specifically, I must've missed it.

There must be sufficient-to-generous public park land set aside. There must be affordable housing. There must be environmental clean-up. Natural and social sustainability must be an essential and driving gear of the whole project.

THERE NEEDS TO BE A NEW BRIDGE FOR USE BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC OVER THE RIVER AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

There should be no concert venues, retail shops, soccer stadiums or anything else attracting large crowds. That has no place in Lincoln Park and will create a traffic nightmare. No high rise buildings either, this isn't New York.

This area, even with proposed infrastructure enhancements, can not support a 20,000 person stadium venue.

This project should not be about increasing density, taxes and revenue for the City -- the quality of life in life in Lincoln Park and Lakeview is far more important. A stadium/music venue must go. Chicago already has a very viable music scene (known throughout the world) which is a major attraction to our City. Live Nation and Ticketmaster are predatory and just destroy the local venues and should be banned from Chicago. Why is Chicago allowing our City to become Developer Led rather than the allowing the Planning Department to do the City planning? Developers have minimal interest in the City -- only their bottom line -- and that means the most "density" as possible.

Traffic congestion and more people will result severely overburden our streets, highways and schools.

Trying to develop a second downtown area based on river

Two parks, make it one.

USL soccer teams in cities that have MLS teams (the Fire is an MLS team) have attendance less than 3,000. A 20,000 seat soccer stadium is excessive and seems to be a waste of land.

Venues do not belong in middle of neighborhoods. It took decades to get Wrigly Field acceptable, but MAJOR difference is it has been there for +100 years. Everyone living there chose to be there knowing poor infracture when they chose. LY is in middle of some significant neighborhoods.

Very concerned about a 20,000 seat stadium and a 70 story building. Traffic is a nightmare already.

Very concerned with the density and basically not having the infrastructure to handle it. So my first rejection would be on the 700 ft height.

Very tall skyscrapers

Way too little actual park space. It's deceitful that they included walkways etc in their calculation of park space.

Way too much density is proposed. Significant infrastructure improvement (combination of roads and railways) is required for even modest density increases (no concert or soccer stadium)

We are 100% against the development.

We should reject the notion that building heights should be limited and push for taller buildings. I think that if a couple adjacent buildings can be composed into one 'supertall' building, then there would be more room for park space - this could be an excellent compromise and optimize land use.

We should reject this notion that we need highways zipping us every which way. Build and let people bring energy to this land. Enough with the bellyaching about where you'll be able to park your private auto...or how long your solo-occupant car will take to get through this area. Try taking an El...a bus...a train. This city is nuts with our auto-centric minds. We cut off our hands if it meant we could drive faster or park closer to our homes. Get a garage if you want easy parking.

Whatever this advisory board is anyone who thinks that general iron park should be the only thing built should be removed. Anyone who cannot see the bigger picture needs to be changed for someone that has a broader understanding of looking at a large scale change to the river.

I get we are park starved but if there will be a connection to the REST OF THE CORRIDOR — ALL 700+ ACRES on the river, I think that’s fine and can be done tastefully. I love the idea of an open park area and lots of space but let’s look at the bigger picture here. We are in an urban setting but we can’t really afford to wedge a suburban sized park in a dense part of town where a broad project like this could help offset our financial issues with increased revenue generated from new property taxes.

Worrying AT ALL about cars. This is a city, folks. We will not be legitimately world-class until we undo some of our reliance on cars.